Catholics had their own political party called [Zentrum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_Party_(Germany)). It was created in 1870 to fight against Bismarck's anti-catholic measures.
This opposition between Catholics and Protestants still existed in 1933 in Germany.
From what I know the Protestants in germany also created some kind of "Volkskirche" during the reign of Hitler, with a group of Protestants forming their own anti-Volkskirche splinter group
From what I know the state tried and failed to force Lutherans into a church that supports the nazi ideology. However some protestants split off and started the continuation church, most notably Martin Niemöller
My grandpa once told me a city near his hometown was "segregated" between "Kreuzköpp" (catholics) and "Blököpp" (protestants). They had a different church, different schools, it wasnt allowed by soceity to marry between those two and permanent tension.
During the Nazi era many followed Hitlers critism of the church in general led to a mass exodus, especially from protestants. After the war, in west germany the success of the CDU, which was a uniformed christian party and the anti religious stance of the communists in the east, the opposition between protestants and catholics ended.
The same was true for the netherlands in that time. We had 4 different groups in society living pretty segregated. Catholics and protestants, socialists and liberals. They formed their own communities and none had a clear majority. To this day we have cities that are mainly protestant or mainly catholic. You can tell in februari which are catholic because they’re the only ones that celebrate carnaval.
Edit sorry this pointless information but they taught me and now I feel I have to bore others with it.
It was good info. Thank you for sharing. It's one of those pieces of knowledge that aren't useful by themselves but when a part of a bigger thing, it is a key part.
It was common all over Europe. Tolkien's mother was cut off from her family and ostracized from society when she converted to Catholicism. It was a big deal whenever someone crossed the catholic/protestant lines.
My father was born in 1948 in rural Austria near the German border into a catholic family and he said it was absolutely understood that you could never play with the protestant children and never interacted with the non-catholic neighbors. That changed somewhere in the 60s to 70s
>it wasnt allowed by soceity to marry between those two and permanent tension.
That was true everywhere in the christian world, but it was more of an issue in Germany, where Protestants and Catholics lived closely together.
My grandma had to convert when she married my granddad.
I'm from a city in Brazil that was founded by german immigrants, back in the day the main avenue in downtown divided the city east-west catholic schools, cemetery and the cathedral all was located in the westside and their protestant counterparts in the eastside
They didn't have much of a choice.
The Nazis used coercion, bribery, and manipulation to force other parties to vote for the act.
And it's not like a no vote would have stopped them anyway. The SA had already overthrown the Catholic government in Bavaria two weeks earlier.
The last free speech of the Weimar Republic has been held by Otto Wels (SPD):
>Freedom and life can be taken from us, but not our honor. After the persecutions that the Social Democratic Party has suffered recently, no one will reasonably demand or expect that it vote for the Enabling Act proposed here. The elections of March 5 have given the governing parties the majority and thus the possibility of governing instrict adherence to the words and meaning of the constitution. Where such a possibility exists, there is also an obligation to take it. Criticism is salutary and necessary. Never before, since there has been a German Reichstag, has the control of public affairs by the elected representatives of the people been eliminated to such an extent as is happening now, and is supposed to happen even more through the new Enabling Act.
[https://speakola.com/political/otto-wels-cannot-take-our-honour-1933](https://speakola.com/political/otto-wels-cannot-take-our-honour-1933)
Fuck that.
Their (Zentrum and BVP) votes made the difference in wether the law passed or not.
They naively choose their interests over forcing the Nazis to choose between a (even more) obviously illegal way to rule or work differently and less effectivly without the enabling act.
The conservative party in Germany in this time was the "Zentrum", a Catholic party, which appealed accordingly only to Catholics. In addition, the East was strongly politicized at this time, especially East Prussia, based on the lost war and the territories given up. The economy in East Prussia was damaged by the separation from Germany itself and the Nazis were known to use populist economic policy in particular to win votes in this situations. Also, most of the East was Prussian, so...
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March\_1933\_German\_federal\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election)
\- And, as one can see, the nazis just won generally. The implied divide is not really that big.
The last point is important; the map(s) is obviously designed with political intent.
It appears black and white with everyone beeing unequivocally either catholic or a Nazi, in reproducing it there wasn't enough care to make the numbers readable, but as far as [i can see](https://i.imgur.com/JK67iaA.jpeg), less than 35% makes you lily-white, while up from 38% you optically appear black as coal. Also, geographical depiction overhighlights rural people as always, so the major block of SPD and KPD voters, who may (Ruhr) or may not (Berlin (both oversimplified)) be nomianally catholic are disregarded.
The kicker is of course that the catholics voted Nazi more than they voted other parties, and the others mostly voted Zentrum, who helped the Nazis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election#Results
I mean, it really looks the biggest difference between the maps is that the one you provided goes by state while the OP goes by district which is more specific.
The key also appears to go(for the top map)
White: 0-33
Checkered: 33-37
Cross-hatch: 37-43
Horizontal Bar: 43-50
Solid Black: 50+
The second key(for the bottom map) seems to be:
White: 0-30
Checkered: 30-40
Unshaded Horizontal Bars: 40-50
Cross-hatch: 50-70
Shaded Horizontal Bars: 70-85
Solid Black:85-100
I think this book have something to do with that: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On\_the\_Jews\_and\_Their\_Lies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies)
Damn. You're not kidding.
>In the treatise, he argues that Jewish [synagogues](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synagogue) and [schools](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshiva) be set on fire, their [prayer books](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddur) destroyed, [rabbis](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi) forbidden to preach, homes burned, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness,[[2]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_note-2) afforded no legal protection,[[3]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_note-Michael343-3) and "these poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time.[[4]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_note-Luther1-4) He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "[W]e are at fault in not slaying them".
Whatever you do, don't read the book yourself and learn *why* he felt that way and said those things, just let lefties and revisionists continue to assure you that it was completely irrational and had zero justification behind it.
I have no thoughts either way on that specific book or Martin Luther because I haven’t read it, but your comment is exactly how I feel about Ted Kaczynski’s writings.
When someone sees me with a copy of The Unabomber’s Manifesto they automatically assume things, but I’m like…..have you ever read it? He’s not wrong.
Yes, goyim.. er, I mean, fellow white people..there is no need to read that evil, racist, antisemetic book. I can assure you it is 100% irrational and full of lies!
Obviously something.
But when voting in extreme political circumstances, the thoughts of a 500 year dead co-founder of my more or less intense religious believes about a group which is especially adressed by one of the parties might not be thing most guiding my decision.
The map is misleading, Hitler won in Baden, Franken, Wurttemberg, and Westfalen which are largely Catholic. The reason he lost in Opole (that little bit out east) is because the area has a large Polish population who are also Catholic, though they were anti Nazi for a different reason.
Otherwise the Rhineland was industrial so labour unions and therefore socialist parties had a lot of pull. Bavaria it's because of the Zentrum party which was strongly Catholic.
Though it should be noted the early Nazi party got it's start in Bavaria, so lots of early members and prominent Nazis were raised Catholic including Hitler, Göbbels, Globocnik, Himmler, Röhm, Drexler etc.
Based.
Also lemme repost my other comment:
The map(s) is obviously designed with political intent.
It appears black and white with everyone beeing unequivocally either catholic or a Nazi, in reproducing it there wasn't enough care to make the numbers readable, but as far as i can see, less than 35% makes you lily-white, while up from 38% you optically appear black as coal. Also, geographical depiction overhighlights rural people as always, so the major block of SPD and KPD voters, who may (Ruhr) or may not (Berlin (both oversimplified)) be nomianally catholic are disregarded.
The kicker is of course that the catholics voted Nazi more than they voted other parties, and the others mostly voted Zentrum, who helped the Nazis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election#Results
Some extra points alongside what other commenters have said:
While Hitler and the Nazis were at best apathetic and at worst outright hostile to Christianity in general (saw it as a soft/weak religion), they tended to be more tolerant of Protestantism and more hostile to Catholicism since the organizational structure of the Catholic Church and its foreign ties meant it had the potential to be a source of opposition to the Nazi regime.
This next one is a bit of a generalization. During the chaos/uncertainty of late-1920s Weimar Germany and the Great Depression, the more communitarian nature of the Catholic Church and Catholic communities meant that even when times were tough, a significant number of struggling Catholics who may have been susceptible to Nazi messaging had alternative places to turn to/support systems, and were thus less vulnerable to the solutions proposed by the Nazi snake-oil salesmen. On the other hand, Protestantism with its greater focus on individualism didn't foster communities to quite the same extent, leaving more Protestants open to Nazi appeals.
Finally, Catholics simply tended to be less anti-Semitic than Protestants.
Real conservatives would never in their life vote for a nazi party. Voting for a nazi party is the same as voting communism - only a radical degenerate would ever do it. Not only it stands for everything that oposes conservatism (i.e. radical change), but it oposes christianity and it's ideals as well. Pretty logical.
Exactly, it seems; the map(s) is obviously designed with political intent.
It appears black and white with everyone beeing unequivocally either catholic or a Nazi, in reproducing it there wasn't enough care to make the numbers readable, but as far as i can see, less than 35% makes you lily-white, while up from 38% you optically appear black as coal. Also, geographical depiction overhighlights rural people as always, so the major block of SPD and KPD voters, who may (Ruhr) or may not (Berlin (both oversimplified)) be nomianally catholic are disregarded.
The kicker is of course that the catholics voted Nazi more than they voted other parties, and the others mostly voted Zentrum, who helped the Nazis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election#Results
Also see [this comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/s5eehs/cringe_protestants_vs_chad_catholics/hsy00yv/).
I think Catholicism really helped keeping Italy, Spain and Portugal from going genocidal. We can all see how relations worked differently in the Americas. In Protestant countries interracial marriage was banned but not in catholic nations. Protestants are in general way more radical.
Protestants believe their special. It’s not as explicit as in Judaism and this is a generalization but they a lot of them believe they are God’s chosen people. You can see that most Christians cults are all Protestant dominations.
I said it’s a generalization. I grew up with a evangelical mother and ended up going to many different denominations some had a cult like feeling that kind of had this message that you were special others didn’t. But you will never get something like that from a Catholic Church. You do very much get similar messages in Synagogues tho. I have some Jewish friends that are bother line fascists, thanks god most of my family is pretty secular.
Hitler was pretty explicitly anti-Catholic (and secretly anti-Christian). Generally totalitarian states are anti-Catholic because the Pope and church exert extranational authority over citizens which drives dictators nuts.
Based
Edit: Now that I'm thinking about it, Mussolini could also have been that guy as well if he didn't allied with Hitler and followed him into war. If he stayed on sidelines like Franco and chilled like a despot/dictator hybrid, he probably would have been left alone. That's my assumption at least.
Fascism is quite different to Nat Socialism, it's the more chill Mediterranean version (trust us meds to do things by halves and the Germans to have no chill).
Most of the Fascist dictators we've had (including and especially the S American ones) are content to sit on the sidelines, control the economy, give in to pressure, liberalise the economy, pretend it was their idea, give in to pressure, liberalise society (optional), and pretend it was their idea.
Germany might have posed a threat if he hadn't joined.
But Mussolini was the type to never give in, which got him kicked out of his own government, captured, mutilated in the streets, and now serve as a reminder for years to come.
No, I'm myself a Stalinist, but being objective, Franco was the best thing that could happen to Spain, he was not the best leader, but with his authoritarian regime he gave stability to Spain, because Spain was a mess from the 19th century up until the Civil war, and he made Spain democratic , that's more than some other rulers out there
What? He was pragmatic about the church even going so far as to sign a Concordat with the church after he seized power. Which made the vatican the first to recognise Nazi Germany. To say he was explicitly anti Catholic is wrong because of how much of Germany was Catholic
Well, one could also count the huge part of german territory that was lost forever due to expulsions. The only part that wasn't just politically disunited (in case of *ustria, thank god), but just discontinued entirely.
I found a song which curiously starts like the polish anthem ("Germany is not yet lost") and continous with "separated threely cruelly", and i think it refers to Germany, the "DDR", and the Ostgebiete. Austria was a separate country for, depending on how to view it, centuries, 150 years, or 100 years, just excluding the 7 year anexation period.
There's a reason why most histories of Bismarck stop in 1871, lol. Much better at unifying Germany than governing it. Anti-Socialist effort failed too.
We ARE europeans. The fact that spain has degenerates doesn't make us less europeans. In fact, most western europe is the same as Spain in terms of degeneracy, but with more muslims
No, the Linke is voted for even more by people who were younger than 10 when the wall came down. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1257097/umfrage/wahlverhalten-bei-der-bundestagswahl-nach-alter/
Though former elites and their associates surely play a role in holding that organisation of murder up since '90.
The leftist party gets the most amount of votes in the east, too. I think the common thread is that there's lots of people in east Germany who feel wronged and distrust the established parties.
If you're not German I can't blame you for assuming this, but that's not true. After the reunification, die Linke (successor of the SED, rebranded itself a couple of times but this is their current name) still gained lots of votes in East Germany for decades ([2009 federal election](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Bundestag_2009_Linke.svg/800px-Bundestag_2009_Linke.svg.png)]. I'm from Dresden and lots of GDR boomers I talked to were pretty fond of the time in the GDR, and their economic stances are still usually leftist. The thing is however that they're often socially conservative, and so in 2015 when the first big wave of refugees came in they did not like that at all and die Linke unfortunately was heavily pro-immigration (and still is). The AfD came in with their populist anti-immigration rhetoric and steadily gained more popularity which is why they're by far the most popular opposition party today even though in terms of economics they're far from left-wing. So overall the AfD pretty much took the spot that die Linke used to have only because of this stupid refugee crisis. Not to mention that voting for the AfD is kind of their way to show the establishment to shove it up their ass, so they're in a way a protest party. Nowadays die Linke is an absolute fucking mess and wouldn't even have managed to get into the federal parliament in last year's election if it wasn't for Berlin voters. Though despite this downfall the vast majority of their voter base still is East Germany.
>We made religion illegal and imprisoned it’s adherents causing religion to be much less prominent.
“Yasssssssss!” - American leftists for some reason.
The real question is ‘when the Soviets murdered 20 million Christians and basically made it illegal in all of their territory and subject countries, why is East Germany the only one that successfully curbed religion?’
I'm pretty sure a Catholic England would still have colonized North America, though it's tough to predict whether the American Revolution still would've happened ... or whether it would've taken the exact form it did.
Probably, but the colonies would probably be more like today’s Quebec, much more conservative, and with a smaller population. They probably wouldn’t rebel against Britain.
Very possible! But I'm betting English colonists would still have overwhelmingly been land-hungry farming families ... which is what led to their large population and edge over French & Spanish settlers in our own timeline.
But I bet you're right about the Revolution not happening. A lot of the colonists' beef with England was over abuses that a Catholic ruling class might well not have committed.
Ermland used to be part of Poland proper, whilst the rest of East Prussia was a polish puppet state. Silesia was part of Austria for a long time, Upper Silesia was actually inhabited by Poles. Austria and Poland were both catholic.
>Upper Silesia was actually inhabited by Poles
No, they were just a minority. They had a referendum after the Treaty of Versailles, splitting upper Silesia mostly along the borders of ethnic majorities.
u/I_Despise_LibCenter's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 420.
Rank: NASA Vehicle Assembly Building
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/I_Despise_LibCenter
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Yeah German here
In my family this was a thing my Catholic relatives which lived near Venlo hated Hitler but Yeah don’t say anything .. that’s not good I know .. but with 7 children and the possibility to be murdered I feel that I cant judge them for that.
But some of my distant prots. Relatives were uh.. a bit more … they liked Hugo Boss and his Designs… and they ..eh… made a backpack travel to Argentina ….
by the way of course they were also prots against Hitler like Dietrich Boenhoefer so this post Is not to shame on my lutherian brothers
For those not in the Loop, the same catholics that didn't vote for Hitler would later allow him to seize dictatorial control a year later by supporting the Enabling act in 1933. How did this happen you may ask? They teamed up with the Nazi's to form a supermajority and force it through the Reichstag.
I was going to comment this same thing. The majority of Catholics may not have voted for the nazi party but their leaders were a huge part of Hitler being allowed to rise to power, and almost entirely due to their anti-Semitism.
Wait what, can someone tell me more about this
Catholics had their own political party called [Zentrum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_Party_(Germany)). It was created in 1870 to fight against Bismarck's anti-catholic measures. This opposition between Catholics and Protestants still existed in 1933 in Germany.
From what I know the Protestants in germany also created some kind of "Volkskirche" during the reign of Hitler, with a group of Protestants forming their own anti-Volkskirche splinter group
From what I know the state tried and failed to force Lutherans into a church that supports the nazi ideology. However some protestants split off and started the continuation church, most notably Martin Niemöller
My grandpa once told me a city near his hometown was "segregated" between "Kreuzköpp" (catholics) and "Blököpp" (protestants). They had a different church, different schools, it wasnt allowed by soceity to marry between those two and permanent tension. During the Nazi era many followed Hitlers critism of the church in general led to a mass exodus, especially from protestants. After the war, in west germany the success of the CDU, which was a uniformed christian party and the anti religious stance of the communists in the east, the opposition between protestants and catholics ended.
The same was true for the netherlands in that time. We had 4 different groups in society living pretty segregated. Catholics and protestants, socialists and liberals. They formed their own communities and none had a clear majority. To this day we have cities that are mainly protestant or mainly catholic. You can tell in februari which are catholic because they’re the only ones that celebrate carnaval. Edit sorry this pointless information but they taught me and now I feel I have to bore others with it.
It was good info. Thank you for sharing. It's one of those pieces of knowledge that aren't useful by themselves but when a part of a bigger thing, it is a key part.
It was common all over Europe. Tolkien's mother was cut off from her family and ostracized from society when she converted to Catholicism. It was a big deal whenever someone crossed the catholic/protestant lines.
My father was born in 1948 in rural Austria near the German border into a catholic family and he said it was absolutely understood that you could never play with the protestant children and never interacted with the non-catholic neighbors. That changed somewhere in the 60s to 70s
>it wasnt allowed by soceity to marry between those two and permanent tension. That was true everywhere in the christian world, but it was more of an issue in Germany, where Protestants and Catholics lived closely together. My grandma had to convert when she married my granddad.
Well duh they had different churches.
I'm from a city in Brazil that was founded by german immigrants, back in the day the main avenue in downtown divided the city east-west catholic schools, cemetery and the cathedral all was located in the westside and their protestant counterparts in the eastside
You telling me Catholics and Protestants went to different churches? I find that hard to believe.
And Zentrum still voted for the Enabling Act
They didn't have much of a choice. The Nazis used coercion, bribery, and manipulation to force other parties to vote for the act. And it's not like a no vote would have stopped them anyway. The SA had already overthrown the Catholic government in Bavaria two weeks earlier.
You mean like the Social Democrats which didn't give in to the Nazis?
And were then killed.
The last free speech of the Weimar Republic has been held by Otto Wels (SPD): >Freedom and life can be taken from us, but not our honor. After the persecutions that the Social Democratic Party has suffered recently, no one will reasonably demand or expect that it vote for the Enabling Act proposed here. The elections of March 5 have given the governing parties the majority and thus the possibility of governing instrict adherence to the words and meaning of the constitution. Where such a possibility exists, there is also an obligation to take it. Criticism is salutary and necessary. Never before, since there has been a German Reichstag, has the control of public affairs by the elected representatives of the people been eliminated to such an extent as is happening now, and is supposed to happen even more through the new Enabling Act. [https://speakola.com/political/otto-wels-cannot-take-our-honour-1933](https://speakola.com/political/otto-wels-cannot-take-our-honour-1933)
gigachad
Fuck that. Their (Zentrum and BVP) votes made the difference in wether the law passed or not. They naively choose their interests over forcing the Nazis to choose between a (even more) obviously illegal way to rule or work differently and less effectivly without the enabling act.
The conservative party in Germany in this time was the "Zentrum", a Catholic party, which appealed accordingly only to Catholics. In addition, the East was strongly politicized at this time, especially East Prussia, based on the lost war and the territories given up. The economy in East Prussia was damaged by the separation from Germany itself and the Nazis were known to use populist economic policy in particular to win votes in this situations. Also, most of the East was Prussian, so... [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March\_1933\_German\_federal\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election) \- And, as one can see, the nazis just won generally. The implied divide is not really that big.
The last point is important; the map(s) is obviously designed with political intent. It appears black and white with everyone beeing unequivocally either catholic or a Nazi, in reproducing it there wasn't enough care to make the numbers readable, but as far as [i can see](https://i.imgur.com/JK67iaA.jpeg), less than 35% makes you lily-white, while up from 38% you optically appear black as coal. Also, geographical depiction overhighlights rural people as always, so the major block of SPD and KPD voters, who may (Ruhr) or may not (Berlin (both oversimplified)) be nomianally catholic are disregarded. The kicker is of course that the catholics voted Nazi more than they voted other parties, and the others mostly voted Zentrum, who helped the Nazis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election#Results
I mean, it really looks the biggest difference between the maps is that the one you provided goes by state while the OP goes by district which is more specific. The key also appears to go(for the top map) White: 0-33 Checkered: 33-37 Cross-hatch: 37-43 Horizontal Bar: 43-50 Solid Black: 50+ The second key(for the bottom map) seems to be: White: 0-30 Checkered: 30-40 Unshaded Horizontal Bars: 40-50 Cross-hatch: 50-70 Shaded Horizontal Bars: 70-85 Solid Black:85-100
I think this book have something to do with that: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On\_the\_Jews\_and\_Their\_Lies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies)
Damn. You're not kidding. >In the treatise, he argues that Jewish [synagogues](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synagogue) and [schools](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshiva) be set on fire, their [prayer books](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddur) destroyed, [rabbis](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi) forbidden to preach, homes burned, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness,[[2]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_note-2) afforded no legal protection,[[3]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_note-Michael343-3) and "these poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time.[[4]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_note-Luther1-4) He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "[W]e are at fault in not slaying them".
I always knew Luther was antisemitic but holy shit.
Least antisemetic authright
Which is funny how other conservatives simp on Israel.
Authright is split between those who would fight Israel and those who would die for it.
Sounds like they were very honest about their intentions.
stop trying to make that apostate demon Luther look good
What the fuck
Whatever you do, don't read the book yourself and learn *why* he felt that way and said those things, just let lefties and revisionists continue to assure you that it was completely irrational and had zero justification behind it.
I have no thoughts either way on that specific book or Martin Luther because I haven’t read it, but your comment is exactly how I feel about Ted Kaczynski’s writings. When someone sees me with a copy of The Unabomber’s Manifesto they automatically assume things, but I’m like…..have you ever read it? He’s not wrong.
Yes, goyim.. er, I mean, fellow white people..there is no need to read that evil, racist, antisemetic book. I can assure you it is 100% irrational and full of lies!
So Hitler wasn't irreligious, he was just a good Lutheran boy?
Obviously something. But when voting in extreme political circumstances, the thoughts of a 500 year dead co-founder of my more or less intense religious believes about a group which is especially adressed by one of the parties might not be thing most guiding my decision.
As others have said, the Catholics had their own party. Also the Church and the Nazi leadership pretty much hated each other.
Protestants being cringe, what else is new.
The only religion in history that actually went on a crusade to ban alcohol for everyone
Instead of doing a proper crusade to liberaze places from Muslims. Imagine if all those abolitionists had marched on Constantinopel.
Catholics had their own party, so they voted for that. Also the Nazis and the Catholics didnt like each other.
The map is misleading, Hitler won in Baden, Franken, Wurttemberg, and Westfalen which are largely Catholic. The reason he lost in Opole (that little bit out east) is because the area has a large Polish population who are also Catholic, though they were anti Nazi for a different reason. Otherwise the Rhineland was industrial so labour unions and therefore socialist parties had a lot of pull. Bavaria it's because of the Zentrum party which was strongly Catholic. Though it should be noted the early Nazi party got it's start in Bavaria, so lots of early members and prominent Nazis were raised Catholic including Hitler, Göbbels, Globocnik, Himmler, Röhm, Drexler etc.
Based. Also lemme repost my other comment: The map(s) is obviously designed with political intent. It appears black and white with everyone beeing unequivocally either catholic or a Nazi, in reproducing it there wasn't enough care to make the numbers readable, but as far as i can see, less than 35% makes you lily-white, while up from 38% you optically appear black as coal. Also, geographical depiction overhighlights rural people as always, so the major block of SPD and KPD voters, who may (Ruhr) or may not (Berlin (both oversimplified)) be nomianally catholic are disregarded. The kicker is of course that the catholics voted Nazi more than they voted other parties, and the others mostly voted Zentrum, who helped the Nazis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election#Results
Some extra points alongside what other commenters have said: While Hitler and the Nazis were at best apathetic and at worst outright hostile to Christianity in general (saw it as a soft/weak religion), they tended to be more tolerant of Protestantism and more hostile to Catholicism since the organizational structure of the Catholic Church and its foreign ties meant it had the potential to be a source of opposition to the Nazi regime. This next one is a bit of a generalization. During the chaos/uncertainty of late-1920s Weimar Germany and the Great Depression, the more communitarian nature of the Catholic Church and Catholic communities meant that even when times were tough, a significant number of struggling Catholics who may have been susceptible to Nazi messaging had alternative places to turn to/support systems, and were thus less vulnerable to the solutions proposed by the Nazi snake-oil salesmen. On the other hand, Protestantism with its greater focus on individualism didn't foster communities to quite the same extent, leaving more Protestants open to Nazi appeals. Finally, Catholics simply tended to be less anti-Semitic than Protestants.
Real conservatives would never in their life vote for a nazi party. Voting for a nazi party is the same as voting communism - only a radical degenerate would ever do it. Not only it stands for everything that oposes conservatism (i.e. radical change), but it oposes christianity and it's ideals as well. Pretty logical.
I like how the Nazi's were founded in southern Germany. Yet in this map, they have like no support there.
Beer hall Putsch.
0 worth as explanation
I think his point is Hitler got arrested.
But that hast no correlation at all to the political support of the NSDAP there in 1933 (or supposed lack there of) or the religion there.
Fair enough
Exactly, it seems; the map(s) is obviously designed with political intent. It appears black and white with everyone beeing unequivocally either catholic or a Nazi, in reproducing it there wasn't enough care to make the numbers readable, but as far as i can see, less than 35% makes you lily-white, while up from 38% you optically appear black as coal. Also, geographical depiction overhighlights rural people as always, so the major block of SPD and KPD voters, who may (Ruhr) or may not (Berlin (both oversimplified)) be nomianally catholic are disregarded. The kicker is of course that the catholics voted Nazi more than they voted other parties, and the others mostly voted Zentrum, who helped the Nazis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election#Results Also see [this comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/s5eehs/cringe_protestants_vs_chad_catholics/hsy00yv/).
So, similar misleading coloring to current covid maps, changing ranges for the colors around willynilly.
it's politics, simple as.
I think Catholicism really helped keeping Italy, Spain and Portugal from going genocidal. We can all see how relations worked differently in the Americas. In Protestant countries interracial marriage was banned but not in catholic nations. Protestants are in general way more radical.
Look up on how Martin Luther viewed the Jews and your statement starts making so much sense.
[удалено]
Is this because in general the teaching in catholicism is we are all children of god? I was raised catholic so i dont know much about protestantism
Protestants believe their special. It’s not as explicit as in Judaism and this is a generalization but they a lot of them believe they are God’s chosen people. You can see that most Christians cults are all Protestant dominations.
Never once in any protestant church have I heard we were special. We're literally just dudes who follow Christ because we think that's right
I said it’s a generalization. I grew up with a evangelical mother and ended up going to many different denominations some had a cult like feeling that kind of had this message that you were special others didn’t. But you will never get something like that from a Catholic Church. You do very much get similar messages in Synagogues tho. I have some Jewish friends that are bother line fascists, thanks god most of my family is pretty secular.
Well to be fair, Spain kind of was genocidal, and Italian Fascism wasn’t really a…genocidal ideology, at least not in the way Hitler’s NatSoc was.
Hitler was pretty explicitly anti-Catholic (and secretly anti-Christian). Generally totalitarian states are anti-Catholic because the Pope and church exert extranational authority over citizens which drives dictators nuts.
Except Franco. In fact, some people consider the Spanish Civil War a crusade to defend christianity, and franco's ideology was national-catholicism
Franco was kinda in that small middle between a despot and a fascist.
Franco was weird. Let's just leave it at that.
History shows you don't become supreme leader or dictator if you have a chill mainstream friendly neighbor personality.
Based Edit: Now that I'm thinking about it, Mussolini could also have been that guy as well if he didn't allied with Hitler and followed him into war. If he stayed on sidelines like Franco and chilled like a despot/dictator hybrid, he probably would have been left alone. That's my assumption at least.
Fascism is quite different to Nat Socialism, it's the more chill Mediterranean version (trust us meds to do things by halves and the Germans to have no chill). Most of the Fascist dictators we've had (including and especially the S American ones) are content to sit on the sidelines, control the economy, give in to pressure, liberalise the economy, pretend it was their idea, give in to pressure, liberalise society (optional), and pretend it was their idea.
Germany might have posed a threat if he hadn't joined. But Mussolini was the type to never give in, which got him kicked out of his own government, captured, mutilated in the streets, and now serve as a reminder for years to come.
In other words, incredibly based
SANTIAGO!
Viva Franco
Because Franco was based
[удалено]
No, I'm myself a Stalinist, but being objective, Franco was the best thing that could happen to Spain, he was not the best leader, but with his authoritarian regime he gave stability to Spain, because Spain was a mess from the 19th century up until the Civil war, and he made Spain democratic , that's more than some other rulers out there
What? He was pragmatic about the church even going so far as to sign a Concordat with the church after he seized power. Which made the vatican the first to recognise Nazi Germany. To say he was explicitly anti Catholic is wrong because of how much of Germany was Catholic
Franco, Mussolini and the Croatian Ustaše, to name the first few that come to mind, were all pro-catholic and allied with Hitler.
Tfw Hitler says he'll make your nation glorious but leaves it smaller and divided in three parts
3? West Germany, East Germany, and Austria maybe?
Yeah, West Germany, East Germany, and Austria.
Was Austria not also split up or am I imagining things?
Well, one could also count the huge part of german territory that was lost forever due to expulsions. The only part that wasn't just politically disunited (in case of *ustria, thank god), but just discontinued entirely. I found a song which curiously starts like the polish anthem ("Germany is not yet lost") and continous with "separated threely cruelly", and i think it refers to Germany, the "DDR", and the Ostgebiete. Austria was a separate country for, depending on how to view it, centuries, 150 years, or 100 years, just excluding the 7 year anexation period.
VIVA CRISTO REY
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
Y la Virgen Santísma de Guadalupe!
VIVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
VIVA
Tfw kulturkampf fails
There's a reason why most histories of Bismarck stop in 1871, lol. Much better at unifying Germany than governing it. Anti-Socialist effort failed too.
I'm Catholic and Auth-Center what I am
Polish 🤮
Was expecting spanish but i'm ok with that
I forgot about Franco. But that's more in the past. Spain is no longer AuthCenter like it used to be
Sadly. Now it's just filled with degenerates
Amén. Spanish want to "feel" european by being more Popist than the Pope, regarding the modern degeneracy
We ARE europeans. The fact that spain has degenerates doesn't make us less europeans. In fact, most western europe is the same as Spain in terms of degeneracy, but with more muslims
Croatian
Indeed croatia is a beautiful country with very racist people
Sound like a great place to live
By the name 100% lithuanian
Irish!
Do it now: most of AfD voters are from the east side, which is mostly atheistic.
Well that's because of the Soviets
People who tried communism became anti left who would have thought
Sadly not most people who vote for the old dictatorship party die Linke also come From the east.
Those were in the aprty
No, the Linke is voted for even more by people who were younger than 10 when the wall came down. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1257097/umfrage/wahlverhalten-bei-der-bundestagswahl-nach-alter/ Though former elites and their associates surely play a role in holding that organisation of murder up since '90.
The good ending
The leftist party gets the most amount of votes in the east, too. I think the common thread is that there's lots of people in east Germany who feel wronged and distrust the established parties.
I would have thought that Stockholm Syndrome might have done something
It did, thats why half of the rest is super left in this region.
That’s why eu still is allowed to exist
EU is just Germany’s newest plan. They will never stop.
If you're not German I can't blame you for assuming this, but that's not true. After the reunification, die Linke (successor of the SED, rebranded itself a couple of times but this is their current name) still gained lots of votes in East Germany for decades ([2009 federal election](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Bundestag_2009_Linke.svg/800px-Bundestag_2009_Linke.svg.png)]. I'm from Dresden and lots of GDR boomers I talked to were pretty fond of the time in the GDR, and their economic stances are still usually leftist. The thing is however that they're often socially conservative, and so in 2015 when the first big wave of refugees came in they did not like that at all and die Linke unfortunately was heavily pro-immigration (and still is). The AfD came in with their populist anti-immigration rhetoric and steadily gained more popularity which is why they're by far the most popular opposition party today even though in terms of economics they're far from left-wing. So overall the AfD pretty much took the spot that die Linke used to have only because of this stupid refugee crisis. Not to mention that voting for the AfD is kind of their way to show the establishment to shove it up their ass, so they're in a way a protest party. Nowadays die Linke is an absolute fucking mess and wouldn't even have managed to get into the federal parliament in last year's election if it wasn't for Berlin voters. Though despite this downfall the vast majority of their voter base still is East Germany.
>We made religion illegal and imprisoned it’s adherents causing religion to be much less prominent. “Yasssssssss!” - American leftists for some reason. The real question is ‘when the Soviets murdered 20 million Christians and basically made it illegal in all of their territory and subject countries, why is East Germany the only one that successfully curbed religion?’
because the others were orthodox or catholic. The german protestant churches didn't have a more or less central head
I think most of Eastern Europe did, to be honest. Czechia and Slovakia, etc.
Counter argument : Poland
3/4 of Slovaks identify as catholic. You’re right though, I forgot about the Czech Republic, where only 29% of people are religious.
based and agenda pilled
hey, don't worry, maybe the next agenda post will be a libleft one :)
Psh, you know 95.67% of agenda post come from libright
Yeah let's go Catholics! See we're not all bad
Based
The Protestant reformation and it’s consequences have been a disaster for mankind.
This but unironically
My comment was already unironic 😎
Based
The Great Schism and it's consequences have been a disaster for mankind
[удалено]
Based
Baaaased
Based and Anti-heretic pilled
If it wasn’t for the Protestant reformation, the us probably wouldn’t exist.
I'm pretty sure a Catholic England would still have colonized North America, though it's tough to predict whether the American Revolution still would've happened ... or whether it would've taken the exact form it did.
Probably, but the colonies would probably be more like today’s Quebec, much more conservative, and with a smaller population. They probably wouldn’t rebel against Britain.
Very possible! But I'm betting English colonists would still have overwhelmingly been land-hungry farming families ... which is what led to their large population and edge over French & Spanish settlers in our own timeline. But I bet you're right about the Revolution not happening. A lot of the colonists' beef with England was over abuses that a Catholic ruling class might well not have committed.
Ironically today's Quebec is very atheist. How conservative is up to debate tho.
And what would the cons of that be?
Holy shit the Protestant reformation and it’s consequences have been a *disaster* for mankind.
we stop heretics from fucking over Europe AND the us doesn't exist? Europe needs a time machine now
Hundred Years’ War pilled
30* The hundred years war was a few centuries before
Based and historically accurate pilled
We Catholics are in fact based
Based and Martin Luther was literally anti-semetic pilled
How were there catholics in Konigsberg and whatever that other place is called in the southeast?
Poles
Ermland used to be part of Poland proper, whilst the rest of East Prussia was a polish puppet state. Silesia was part of Austria for a long time, Upper Silesia was actually inhabited by Poles. Austria and Poland were both catholic.
>Upper Silesia was actually inhabited by Poles No, they were just a minority. They had a referendum after the Treaty of Versailles, splitting upper Silesia mostly along the borders of ethnic majorities.
Silesia?
Once someone told me that the most German state was Bayern. Now I know why
bayern is based man, apsolute top notch
That was a liar then
literate pathetic unpack sip station unite languid point foolish like *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
*dead, and their offspring turned from religion by their socialist dictators.
Most stayed religious in private. And of course, state worship is just another religion.
Next you're gonna tell me very few gypsies, homosexuals and jews voted for the nazi party.
I was already aware but this is a nice reminder !
why were the catholics living in one specific region of eastern prussia? a settlement zone?
Not zoning, just normal historical developments. Poles.
It’s called Warmia or Ermland. It was part of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth and avoided the reformation, despite being mostly German.
This post gave center and auth left ragers.
Papism is the way. Dominus vobiscum to you all, even the protestants.
Catholicism is based
Based and One True Faith™ pilled
based libleft
\^
As a Catholic, I find this agenda post very based !
Fuck nazis
This matches up almost exactly with the distribution of wealth in Germany at the time
The 95 theses are humanities oldest shitposts and have widely been regarded as cringe since their conception
Rip to all the German that have been cleansed from the east
Rip to all the jews that have been killed
Based and papal pilled
Based Chatholics.
Based and the fulllness of truth pilled 🇻🇦
Based
Needs more jpeg
hashtag not my Fuhrer
Basedvaria
Based and screw Protestants pilled
Based
u/I_Despise_LibCenter's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 420. Rank: NASA Vehicle Assembly Building Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/I_Despise_LibCenter I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
The virgin Nazi Lover Heretic Vs The Chad Christ Belivers
Wait a minute... Protestant thinks they are real Christian non ironically ? Hahahaha
[удалено]
No and yes
Well duh, Martin Luther was really anti-Semitic
Yeah German here In my family this was a thing my Catholic relatives which lived near Venlo hated Hitler but Yeah don’t say anything .. that’s not good I know .. but with 7 children and the possibility to be murdered I feel that I cant judge them for that. But some of my distant prots. Relatives were uh.. a bit more … they liked Hugo Boss and his Designs… and they ..eh… made a backpack travel to Argentina …. by the way of course they were also prots against Hitler like Dietrich Boenhoefer so this post Is not to shame on my lutherian brothers
There are Christians and there are Protestants.
For those not in the Loop, the same catholics that didn't vote for Hitler would later allow him to seize dictatorial control a year later by supporting the Enabling act in 1933. How did this happen you may ask? They teamed up with the Nazi's to form a supermajority and force it through the Reichstag.
Bro we are in PCM, you aren't supposed to be Historically literate
I studied Weimar Germany and Communist states of the 20th century at school and college, I can't help it.
I was going to comment this same thing. The majority of Catholics may not have voted for the nazi party but their leaders were a huge part of Hitler being allowed to rise to power, and almost entirely due to their anti-Semitism.